c++ - Can I use always emplace to replace insert for single element insertion?

I was wondering if it is OK to always use emplace to replace insert when inserting a single element into a STL container, like set, unordered_set?

From the signature, emplace is simpler and do not involve overloads. Is there any issue with stop using insert and use emplace all the time?

Note: there are SO questions asking about the difference between emplace and insert/push_back etc. (e.g. here, here, and here) I understand the difference, and it seems to me that emplace is better in every way. I just want to confirm if it's OK to deprecate insert.

Answer

There are some examples here that can be adapted to emplace and insert, showing when the behaviour may differ.

These examples may seem a bit artificial, so I'll give one that will hopefully appear less so:

#include 

template 
T id(T x) { return x; }


int main() {
    std::set s;
    s.insert(id);       // OK
    s.emplace(id);      // error
    s.emplace(id); // OK
}

insert can deduce the template parameter of id because it knows what type it wants. For emplace you get an error unless you explicitly specify.